Thursday, December 30 2010

Journo Speaks Out: No Free Speech in PA

I'm impressed that a newspaper outside of Israel has picked up on the story George Canavati. PA security forces incarcerated the Radio Bethlehem journalist for five days, because he dared to report on a power struggle between Mahmoud Abbas and Mohammed Dahlan.

Harriet Sherwood of The Guardian caught up with the just-released Canavati.

Asked if he believed the detention was intended to intimidate him, Canawati responded by twisting his ear between thumb and forefinger. "I didn't make a mistake [in my report]," he said. "I was professional to the true sense of the word. I will never take their pinch of ear into consideration."

The Palestinian Media Forum recently complained about other journalists detained by PA security forces. And a recent poll found that only 27 percent of the people in the West Bank believe they can criticize PA authorities without fear (down from 56 percent in 2007).

West Bank press freedom is an important story that hasn't broken into Big Media consciousness, and I'm glad Sherwood put it on the table. Read the whole story.

Wednesday, December 29 2010

No Time For Israel: An In-Depth Analysis

When Time magazine published its September cover story, "Why Israel Doesn't Care About Peace," we were stunned by the article's fundamental misrepresentation of Israeli attitudes. We wondered whether that article was a one-time failure of objectivity or if it represented a prevalent bias in Time’s reporting on Israel.

So HonestReporting reviewed Time’s reporting on Israel over an entire year November 2009 – November 2010. Click the image below to see the long-term study.

For as long as newspapers have accepted money to publish advertisements, there tension between the employees responsible for content (editors and the newsroom staff) and the staffers with bottom line concerns (that would be the advertising staff).

Usually, potential conflicts of interests are on the level of something like a restaurant owner pushing for a nice review in the local paper where he's a regular advertiser. The restauranteur will typically contact his advertising account person, push for a story, and only to be rebuffed.

"I don't handle content. You'll have to take it up with the appropriate editor," is the firm-but-polite reply many an ad salesman has made for years.

Which brings us to Reuters. According to the IR Web Report, Reuters recently began sticking client press releases into its news feed.

One of the five principles states: “That Thomson Reuters shall supply unbiased and reliable news services to newspapers, news agencies, broadcasters and other media subscribers and to businesses governments, institutions, individuals and others with whom Thomson Reuters has or may have contracts.”

However, the Reuters news feed delivered to Yahoo! Finance now includes complete, unedited press releases from Thomson Reuters’ corporate clients in amongst Reuters news articles. Press releases of non-Thomson Reuters clients are not being distributed to Yahoo! Finance. The press release headlines are virtually indistinguishable from the newswire’s editorial content.

By breaking down the separation between the editorial and business aspects, Reuters has opened the door to public scrutiny of its clients and ownership too. I already get enough emails asking about one never-say-die urban legend which has it that Reuters is controlled by Arab corporate interests.

Donald Bostrom won our 2009 Dishonest Reporter award for his shoddy look at allegations of Israeli organ harvesting. Do you think the Swedish journalist will be interested in what the African refugees told PHR about their experiences in the hands of Hamas?

Tuesday, December 28 2010

Copy Editors Asleep At the Wheel

UPDATE December 29: Voice of America corrected the mistake. See VOA blogger Jessica Stahl's comment on this post.

* * *

Ali Akbar Siadat, an Iranian political prisoner, was hanged in Tehran's notorious Evin Prison, accused of spying for Israel. I don't know if Siadat was Jewish, but this Voice of America headline inexplicably thinks he was Israeli.

Arab rage over the 2006 Mohammed cartoons wasn't so spontaneous after all. This just in from Haaretz:

A US diplomatic cable published by Aftenposten said the Syrian premier had, "several days before the demonstrations, instructed the Grand Mufti Sheikh Hassoun to issue a strongly worded directive to the imams delivering Friday sermons in the mosques of Damascus."

The riots ended when Syria "felt that 'the message had been delivered'," the cable said, quoting a Sunni sheikh whose name was blacked out.

More than 100 people were killed in the flames of violence we now know were fanned by Syria.

I was never comfortable with the way Israel has over-emphasized the connection between the Holocaust and the founding of the state. Benny Levy's compelling commentary in YNet News strikes a chord with me:

When President Obama asserted in his Cairo speech that the aspirations for a Jewish homeland originated in our undeniably tragic history, many around here were insulted. “Why did he say that? After all, we’re not here because of the Holocaust.” Yet Obama is not at fault. After all, the Holocaust is the narrative presented by Israel itself to its guests (and to its own sons.)

. . .

The custom of bringing Israel’s guests to Yad Vashem first carries a loud message. It creates the impression that the Holocaust is the reason and justification for the state’s existence; it places Israel on a podium of victimization, refugees, and the quest for a shelter.

However, Israel’s pillars were laid dozens of years before the Holocaust. Its cornerstone is the Zionist idea. Israel is first and foremost a national revival enterprise. Israel is first and foremost a national revival enterprise. Historian Barbara Tuchman once wrote that Israel is the only nation in the world “that is governing itself in the same territory, under the same name, and with the same religion and same language as it did 3,000 years ago."

Indeed, plenty of Western journalists assume that Jewish connections to the Holy Land began only date back to 1917, 1948, even 1967.

There are connections between the Holocaust and Israel's founding. But years of over-emphasis are having a boomerang effect on Israel's public diplomacy.

Monday, December 27 2010

Post-Christmas Morning In Silwan

After seeing this AFP/Getty photo (via IsraellyCool), my first impression was that the photographer in the foreground was likely to get hit by a recoiling slingshot strap. Such is post-Christmas in Silwan.

But on closer look, the slingshot seems too small; the other kid clutching a rock in the background looks more likely to hit any Israeli policemen. At least the mask is an age-appropriate size.

A photographer take photos of Palestinian youth using a slingshot during minor clashes which erupt in the East Jerusalem's Silwan neighborhood on December 26, 2010, as Israeli police increased security in the area to avoid clashes following a municipality order to evict a Palestinian family from their house.

Hebrew language papers also jumped in against the changes, as did Uri Helman, the new director of the Government Press Office.

Foreign journalists currently pay a flat rate tax of 25 percent for their first three years in Israel; afterwards, they pay the same taxes as every one else. Treasury officials wanted to end the special treatment.

But the drama and principles behind the opposing viewpoints were over-rated. Only 23 journalists would've been effected by the proposed changes. So we're not talking about tons of money for the government coffers; the likelihood of news agencies leaving Jerusalem to set up shop in Ramallah or Amman was near zero.

I do wonder, though, if the press corps will give these politicos and their parties some kind of kid-glove treatment. I hope not . . .

Tuesday, December 21 2010

The LA Times picks up on a poll which finds that most Palestinians don't feel free to publicly criticize the Fatah and Hamas authorities they live under.

According to the study, by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR):

Findings also point out to a significant and continued deterioration in public perception of the level of freedoms enjoyed by citizens in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip since the split between these two areas in June 2007. For example, belief that citizens can criticize the authorities in the West Bank without fear retreated from 56% in September 2007 to 27% in this poll. Similarly a retreat occurred in the belief that citizens can criticize the authorities in the Gaza Strip without fear from 52% to 19% during the same period.

The Times also note the spillover effect on Palestinian press freedom:

Fear of criticizing the authority or reporting on something that would upset it prompted Palestinian journalists in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to exercise self censorship, which some organizations said limits creativity and hinders development of the Palestinian media.

Another "option" for Palestinians is to tell reporters what the ruling authorities want to hear. It's sad enough when the man on the street can't talk freely, but it's even more disturbing when more "talking heads" -- the academics, politicians, journalists, activists presented by Big Media as being more authoritative -- also don't tell the truth. Just yesterday, Memri flagged a clip of one such pundit, Al-Quds al-Arabi editor Abd Al-Bari Atwan, saying it's okay to say one thing in Arabic and another in English for Western audiences.

If his name rings a bell, it's because the London-based Atwan, who makes frequent appearances on BBC, CNN, and Sky News, once told Lebanese TV, "If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight," which I'm sure caused no consternation in Ramallah or Gaza City.

It's not always possible to tell if a man on the street is telling you the truth, but reporters can and do mention the context: that people are afraid to speak the freely. Perhaps it's time to apply the same disclaimer to the MSM's regular go-to wonks from Fatahstan and Hamastan.

Monday, December 20 2010

MSM Still Using Casualty Figures Hamas Conceded Were Wrong

AFP picks up on the latest IDF air strike on a Gaza rocket squad. This background snippet is woefully off:

The strike was one of the most deadly since Israel's 22-day war against Gaza's Hamas rulers, dubbed Operation Cast Lead, which began at the end of December 2008 and cost the lives of 1,400 Palestinians, most of them civilians, and 13 Israelis, 10 of them soldiers.

Dr Andre Oboler (http://www.oboler.com) is the Director of the Community Internet Engagement Project at the Zionist Federation of Australia. He is global expert in social media and internet based antisemitism. HonestReporting asked him to bring our readers up to speed on the developing YouTube / PMW revelations.

On Sunday, YouTube acted to close a channel on their service run by Palestinian Media Watch. The explanation YouTube gave related to a video from 2006, originally taken from Hamas’s website, which shows a suicide terrorist says his goodbyes and boasting he will soon drink the blood of Jews.

After this video has been on the YouTube at this address since July, suddenly this exposure of terrorism and hate was a "violation of terms" and was promoting hate speech rather than exposing it. Instead of removing the video, as they had done before (without allowing an avenue for appeal or discussion), YouTube removed the entire channel. This seems to be based on a policy of banning accounts after 5 strikes against the Terms of Use. The mistakes, on YouTube’s part, build up until the account is disabled.

A day later, after coverage by myself in Jerusalem Post, and by Melanie Phillips in the Spectator, as well as an increasing volume of outrage on blogs and via Twitter, the PMW channel was reinstated, but the viewing counts seem conspicuously low.

The most viewed video was only up to 13,363 views. This was particularly odd when there are Palestinian Media Watch videos like “Gaza flotilla participants invoked killing of Jews” with over 200,000 views. It seems searching for “by palwatch” (no quotes) gives far better results than viewing the channel. In short the channel is now broken as a result of YouTube’s intervention.

YouTube still needs to fix the indexing problem, and review their earlier mistakes. It seems only the most recent complaints have been reviewed and found to be invalid. The good news is that it seems this is a systematic flaw in Google’s system, not something they intended to do. But the problem is occurring with other pro-Israel accounts.

It seems someone, or some group of new media anti-Israel activists, are gaming the system. They are taking advantage of YouTube’s automated and semi-automated systems to push their agenda slowly through the system. First one complaint, then a second... until eventually the goal is achieved and the channel itself is shut down. Until YouTube can improve the system, and recognise when people are trying to “trick” the system into doing what they want, rather than what it is intended to do, we all have a serious problem. This isn’t helped when YouTube’s manual override is broken and leaves those who have been targeted in a worse position then they were to start with.

For now, YouTube need to find the accounts that are causing these problems and deactivate them. This problem is far greater than Palestinian Media Watch, though the damage done to them must be fixed, and an apology wouldn’t hurt either.

When social media sites began to gain traction on the Internet around 2006, it was unclear which ones would emerge as the leaders of the pack and which would be consigned to support roles in Internet culture.

By now, the winners have emerged. Facebook and Twitter have become virtually synonymous with social networking. The losers, however, have been much harder to pinpoint, since many social media sites have carved out their own niches on the Internet and continue to draw large numbers of users.

Last week, however, we witnessed one of the first major casualties. Social media pioneer Delicious, which allowed people to “bookmark” their favorite websites and find others who liked the same bookmarks, will be shut down by Internet giant Yahoo, which acquired the site in 2005.

The demise of Delicious (originally spelled del.icio.us) essentially slams the door on the first age of social media. The first sites in the Web 2.0 era, which empowered users to create content on websites they did not own, essentially sought to crowdsource the massive number of Internet users to organize the web so that the best content could gain an audience.

Sites such as Digg and Reddit allowed people to post their favorite online content and let users vote on it. The content that received the most “diggs” was placed on the sites’ front pages – and exposure to their massive readership. Stumbleupon let people “stumble” through content others had tagged by subject.

Delicious took a different approach, allowing people to bookmark sites as they would on their own computers, except the Delicious bookmarks would be visible to the public. The site would also show who else bookmarked the same articles, and what else those users found of interest. The result was a novel way to share content and build communities around common interests.

While Digg and Delicious both gained millions of users, they pale in comparison to the hundreds of millions who use Facebook, which also allows people to share their favorite content as well as to connect with people in many other ways. As social media emerged from the margins of society to the mainstream, niche sites failed to keep pace. Although many content sharing sites maintain large and vibrant communities, they have little impact on the evolving Internet culture.

And now, with Delicious closing its doors, it is time to recognize that an era has ended. As Facebook and Twitter set the pace of social media, some of the groundbreakers are feeling the heat. Delicious may be one of the first to fall. Who will be next?

Sunday, December 19 2010

Going to a fence protest dressed up as Santa is guaranteed to get you photographed.

Now what would it take for a picture of St. Nick protesting PA corruption or Hamas authoritarianism to hit the wires?

A Palestinian man dressed in a Santa Claus outfit and holding a Palestinian flag protests behind Israeli soldiers during a weekly demonstration against Israel's separation barrier in the West Bank village of Maasarah, near Bethlehem, Friday, Dec. 17, 2010. Israel says the barrier is necessary for security while Palestinians call it a land grab. (AP/Nasser Shiyoukhi)

At the end of 2009, many media prognosticators predicted that 2010 would be the year social media would finally lose its outsider status and become part of “The Media” at large.

Did it happen? Well, people still refer to social media as something separate from the rest of media, but the signs indicate that the predictions weren't far from reality.

Look at the New York Times as a case-in-point. The paper of record began 2010 having recently hired a social media editor, Jennifer Preston, to serve as an advocate for social media among the Time’s staff and the public.

By the end of the year, the Times eliminated the position, saying social media was a shared responsibility among all staff. Preston, the soon-to-be former social media editor, said she believes everyone at the paper must work together to create more engagement with the public.

“Social media can’t belong to one person; it needs to be part of everyone’s job,” Preston said. “It has to be integrated into the existing editorial process and production process. I’m convinced that’s the only way we’re going to crack the engagement nut.”

By eliminating the position, the paper essentially acknowledges that there is no longer a need to push social media as a separate entity from its primary output, that social media channels have become part and parcel of delivering the timely news at the New York Times.

That may not be the full integration people predicted a year ago, but it’s a big sign that the integration is well underway. Maybe by the end of 2011, there will be one entity known as "the media" and it will refer to the New York Times and Facebook as valuable sources of information.

I wasn't aware of this, but foreign reporters in Israel get a tax-exemption for their first three years in the country. Treasury officials are likely to change that. Dominic Waghorn of Sky News makes a compelling case against changing the regulations.

He points out it would cause many reporters to move their base of of operations to Ramallah or Amman, and also spark more parachute journalism.

Instead of paying a flat rate of 25 percent for their first three years here, they will have the same deal as Israelis. It will make the government an extra few hundred thousand shekels a year . . .

What Israel needs to avoid at all costs is foreign paratroopers – journalists who land in the country for a few days, armed with a clutch of Wikipedia articles and the book they read on the plane.

You cannot ‘wing it’ if you want to report on this part of the world, although many try to get away with it. More often than not, when they do they take sides, because they think it helps them report the story better. Black and white is easier to communicate, but as we all know, the truth is usually in between.

Israel's one of the most heavily reported countries in the world, so one way or another, the Western press will continue covering developments. And foreign bureaus are disappearing anyway.

But I'm also concerned that the shrinking pool of foreign journalists in Israel will concentrate information among fewer people, which fertilizes the ground for media groupthink.

425,000: Palestinian refugees registered as living in Lebanon.260,000 - 270,000: Refugees actually living in Lebanon.56 percent: Refugee jobless rate.53,000: Refugees considered to have stable employment.66.4: Percentage of refugees living on less than $6.00/day.4.5: Average size of refugee family.$700: Average monthly income for a refugee family.35: Percentage of Lebanese nationals living below poverty line.6: Percentage of Palestinians enrolled in Lebanese universities.20: Percentage of Lebanese enrolled in Lebanese universities.65: Percentage of refugees lacking a grade-9 education.

The full study is expected to be released at the end of the year. But here's the Daily Star's spoiler:

A large amount of blame is being placed on the perceived lack of opportunities, limited by state restrictions requiring Palestinians to obtain work permits and which, in spite of recent relaxations, still exclude Palestinians from certain professions, such as medicine.

Tuesday, December 14 2010

It should be obvious that Israel has nothing in common with Iran and Sudan, but it wasn't the case with Radio-Canada's Simon Durivage.

Durivage apologized for inapporpriately equating the countries after HonestReporting Canada readers took action.

More importantly than the apology, however, the Radio-Canada ombudsman's review (pdf format) sets an important precedent:

"Radio-Canada acknowledged that it was inappropriate to use Iran and Sudan as examples to illustrate the dangers of Canada's unconditional support for Israel."

". . . by erroneously associating Israel with Iran and Sudan, Simon Durivage did not adhere to one of the central principles of CBC/Radio-Canada's Journalistic Standards and Practices, that of accuracy."

"Associating Israel with Iran and Sudan in this way constituted a journalistic error."

It's now on the record that drawing moral equivalence between Israel and rogue states like Iran, Sudan (add North Korea and Cuba to the list too) is inappropriate journalism.

Monday, December 13 2010

Reuters lists a few failed "militant" attacks in the last decade. Care to guess what two items are missing?

Firstly, the word "terror" doesn't appear anywhere. No surprise there. After 9/11, Reuters news chief Stephen Jukes wrote to his staff that

We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist . . .

Also missing are freedom attacks terror attacks against Israel. This fact box isn't all-encompassing content, and failed attacks don't stick in our memory the sadly "successful" ones do. But Israel was and continues to be uniquely targeted.

The single most memorable failed terror attack against Israel was an attempt to blow up the Pi Glilot fuel depot near Tel Aviv. A bomb attached to a tanker truck was detonated by remote control, but an automatic sprinkler system and workers put out the fire, averting a catastrophic fireball. The NY Times wrote:

Another driver, Yaakov Karp, who was fueling his truck nearby, said it was lucky they were filling up with diesel fuel rather than gasoline, which is more volatile. Officials at the depot, named Pi Glilot, also said it was fortunate that the explosion did not take place near the above-ground fuel tanks, which sometimes hold as much as 3,000 tons of fuel. An explosion there could have set off a fireball destroying life and property over a wide area. A disaster drill at the depot three years ago called for the evacuation of 20,000 people in a radius of more than a mile.

Failed terror attacks only reflect an inability to cause harm, not a lack of intent. Try telling that to Reuters. We all know that one man's editor is another man's useful idiot.

I had a hard time articulating what bothered me about Tom Friedman's take on the White House's incentives for a settlement freeze.

Whether or not you agree with the US offer, Jeffrey Golderg's take on Friedman strikes a chord on one important point:

One small note, or not so small -- Tom tends to frame the recent (and generally-speaking unwise) American offer of $3 billion in F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in exchange for a 90-day extension of the settlement freeze as a gift America could not afford to give. But he doesn't mention that military aid to Israel, even heavily subsidized military aid (and to other countries, of course) is a form of stimulus spending, since that $3 billion was going to be used to buy American-made products. You would not look at $3 billion in jet fighters as a costly giveaway if you happened to be one of the thousands of people building those planes. This doesn't change the fact that the offer was shortsighted (really, what were American negotiators thinking?) But it wasn't quite the affront to the hard-up American taxpayer that Friedman makes it out to be.

Three Hamas MPs are freeloading at a Red Cross office in eastern Jerusalem. The Jerusalem Post writes:

During their time at the Red Cross, the politicians have held regular Friday prayer services attended by large crowds of Jerusalem residents; greeted visiting dignitaries, including former American president Jimmy Carter and a Jordanian envoy; and held photo ops with various local Arab notables. Literature supporting their cause has been distributed from the Red Cross compound, and large signs with the legislators’ faces adorn the side of the building.

A Red Cross spokesman told the paper there's no safe haven and police can come arrest Ahmad Attoun, Khaled Abu- Arafa and Muhammad Totah anytime. But how does the IRC explain this?

The Red Cross has provided the politicians with a room inside the building where they can sleep and keep their belongings, a bathroom, electricity for their large protest tent, and a water cooler, it is understood . . .

Do you really think the Red Cross would give me the same privileges if I just showed up and refused to leave?

UPDATE 1:25 p.m. I just spotted Maan News reporting a PA gag order on coverage.

Many Palestinian editors and journalists have been warned against making any public reference to the power struggle between President Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah leader Muhamad Dahlan, an Israeli newspaper reported Sunday.

The story in question is by the Jerusalem Post's Khaled Abu Toameh. I hope AP gives Mohammed Daraghmeh sufficient cover.

* * *

AP's Mohammed Daraghmeh examines the touchy question of who would succeed Mahmoud Abbas, should the PA president resign or become incapacitated.

The story's long overdue, and the PA chairman has threatened to quit so many times (Daled Amos lists them all) that this sort of article was bound to happen.

Days ago, Abbas got things rolling, saying he'd quit and dismantle the PA without another settlement freeze. Khaled Abu Toameh then raised the issue of succession, noting Abbas's frosty relations with younger generation Fatah leaders Mohammed Dahlan, Nasser al-Qidwa, and Ahmed Qurei. That led to a spat in the pages of the PA's Wafa News service, which AP describes from there.

Other possible contenders in the conversation are Marwan Barghouti, Saeb Erekat, Jibril Rajoub and Salam Fayyad.

Abbas's only leverage s to garner world sympathy with threatened resignations. But instead of feeling the world's love, the PA chairman and the rest of the West Bank are reading a story in the world's most extensive wire service -- by a Palestinian stringer, no less -- cautiously boosting Abbas's political rivals.

It's almost as if AP called Abbas's bluff. Might this be the last time he threatens to quit?

Now, his account of the incident has earned him a prestigious Walkley Award, the Australian equivalent of a Pulitzer Prize. The honor disturbs me for three reasons.

Two of the reasons deal with points of contention McGeough was in a unique position to clarify for history's first draft -- but he instead muddied the waters. The third reason has more to do with the language of his dispatch.

Most prominent among the convoy's organizers was the IHH, a radical Islamic relief fund based in Turkey. As Malam points out, the IHH is linked to Hamas,and "supported jihadist terrorist networks in Bosnia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Chechnya." It is also has ties to Turkey's ruling party.

What did McGeough say about the organizers? Not much:

The flotilla drew on funds from NGOs in Turkey, Malaysia, Ireland, Algeria, Kuwait, Greece and Sweden.

With the paper's considerable resources, McGeough and his editors could have and should have been aware of the IHH's background before the correspondent even made his travel plans. If indeed they knew, it was irresponsible to not disclose this.

2. The flotilla was not a "humanitarian convoy."

The convoy's humanitarian veneer masked a political agenda to provoke an embarrassing confrontation with Israel. Some of the people aboard the ships were specifically recruited to attack Israeli soldiers. Among the items found aboard were bullet-proof vests, night vision equipment and rifle scopes, saws, knives, gas masks and slingshots.

Hardly humanitarian.

McGeough missed it.

If the critique ended here, you could reasonably conclude that McGeough was either sloppy,simply had the bad luck of being on the wrong boat while one of 2010's biggest stories unfolded meters away. But then there's my third concern.

Then, the tightening noose. Sneaking up and around every boat, there were bullet-shaped hulks which soon became impossible to hide as the moonlight made fluorescent tubes of their roiling wakes. First one, then two and maybe four could be seen sneaking in from the rear.

They hunted like hyenas – moving up and ahead on the flanks; pushing in, then peeling away; and finally, lagging before lunging.

Lest we forget, here's the headline, which sets a tone for the rest of the story:

Prayers, Tear Gas, and Terror

If there's terror, it's because there are terrorists. That's McGeough and the SMH's subtle, most damning stab at Israel.

You can't expect journalists to write be-all end-all stories. The descriptive language of his own voice suggests McGeough saw exactly what he wanted to see.

And that's not worthy of the honor conferred by the Walkley Foundation's award.

Saturday, December 11 2010

Turkish Premier is a Zionist Tool

Turkish PM Erdogan is a Zionist tool, according to the country's former premier. Necmettin Erbakan, told The Zaman:

The soured relationship with Israel and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's tough line with the Jewish state are all part of a façade to deceive the Turkish public, former Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan has claimed.

In an exclusive interview with Today's Zaman at his house in Balgat, Ankara, the 84-year-old leader of the Felicity Party (SP) criticized the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party), saying it is in the hands of the worldwide Zionist movement. He implied that the rise of the AK Party was helped by the international Jewish conspiracy and vowed that he will fight back to stem the Zionist grip on the neck of Turkey.

If rockets were to rain down on Israeli civilians in Tel Aviv, Israel would still have powerful incentives, as it did in 2006, to keep Syria out of the conflict, but it might also face compelling reasons for targeting Hizbullah facilities in Syria, some of which are in and around populated areas," said the diplomat in the leaked cable, which is titled "Is now the time to raise Hizbullah with Syria?"

Good of Hezbollah to outsource their human shield corps to innocent Syrian civilians. During the Second Lebanon War, Australia's Sunday Herald-Sun published photos outing Hezbollah's suburban warriors.

Wednesday, December 8 2010

Wikileaks: Al-Manar TV Shareholders Targeted for Sanctions

The US embassy in Beirut recommended financial sanctions on 38 shareholders in Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV station. The Daily Star writes:

“Designating them now will reinforce our efforts to discredit Hizbullah and its institutions and deny Hizbullah supporters access to financing that goes through US institutions,” the cable said. “Moreover, the publicity that will greet designation will make other Lebanese think twice about being involved in Hizbullah-connected institutions. Some people may even become more cautious about appearing on Al-Manar programming, for fear of designation.”

It's a gutsy cable, but what about the free speech issue raised by Hezbollah's apologists?

"Any entity maintained by a terrorist group -- whether masquerading as a charity, a business or a media outlet -- is as culpable as the terrorist group itself," said Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey.

Monday, December 6 2010

Shattered Lens: Part 2 - Abusing Sport for Propaganda

In the second part of our major study of of how Reuters, AP and AFP/Getty misuse imagery to distort coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we look at how the wire services cynically exploited the 2010 soccer World Cup to produce negative images of Israel.

Here's a State Dept cable in The Guardian suggesting that Al Jazeera is a tool of the Qatari government.

We expect the trend in favor of using Al Jazeera as an informal tool of GOQ foreign policy to continue undiminished . . .

Over the coming 36 months - in a trend that has held steady over the past three off-sites - the regional Al Jazeera Arabic news channel will continue to be an instrument of Qatari influence, and continue to be an expression, however uncoordinated, of the nation's foreign policy. Qatar will continue to use Al Jazeera as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by Al Jazeera's broadcasts, including the United States.

Al-Jazeera's ability to influence public opinion throughout the region is a substantial source of leverage for Qatar, one which it is unlikely to relinquish. Moreover, the network can also be used as a chip to improve relations. For example, al-Jazeera's more favourable coverage of Saudi Arabia's royal family has facilitated Qatari-Saudi reconciliation over the past year . . .

Despite GOQ protestations to the contrary, al-Jazeera remains one of Qatar's most valuable political and diplomatic tools.

The network's credibility requires an outraged denial, so Al Jazeera has already rejected the cable.

Compared to other Arab state-controlled news agencies, Al Jazeera's product is more polished, its relationship with the ruling elites more sophisticated. But when you get right down to it, the Arab world has zero history of free press and in that regard, Al Jazeera is no different. A government leash is still a leash.

Last week, Hamas (or someone claiming to speak for the terror group) launched an English language Facebook Page for the al Qassam Brigades – Hamas Military Wing. Within days, the group was spotted by Aussie Dave and others, who urged people to “report” the group to Facebook’s administrators.

The group was promptly removed, causing the al Qassam Brigades to lament online that “Facebook administration proves that it is a real cheap tool biased for the Zionist occupation in Palestine.”

While Facebook’s banning of a group that is blacklisted as a terror group by the State Department may not seem like a big story, there are at least two elements that are worth highlighting.

1. We can't expect Facebook to police itself.

With over 500 million members, half of whom sign in daily, Aussie Dave’s advice to press the “report page” button at the bottom of the Hamas Page was right on the money. Facebook, like YouTube, Google, and others, relies on users to flag inappropriate content.

Sites like YouTube, which gets many hours of uploads every minute of the day, generally move quickly to remove inappropriate content, but someone needs to bring the content to YouTube’s attention. And more complaints will probably bring about quicker action, so don’t assume someone else will flag something. If you see it, “report” it.

2. Hamas clearly recognizes the importance of Facebook in its effort to win support and followers.

In the battle for hearts and minds, go where the target audience goes. Today, there is no doubt that Facebook has become a central meeting place for people of all ages, races, and virtually all nationalities.

Facebook is also one of the most viral platforms on the Internet today. The site makes it extraordinarily easy to share information in any form, helping it spread from network to network quickly and efficiently. Since the average Favcebook user has 130 “friends” and no two people have the same friends, every someone reposts something he or she saw on Facebook, it reaches a whole new audience.

Just like the pro-Israel community, Hamas is fighting to win support from people who do not have strong views on the Middle East conflict. Since Hamas clearly sees English speaking Facebook users as a target audience, Israel’s supporters should make every effort to ensure that their pro-Israel message is heard on Facebook.

Maybe next time Hamas attempts to start a group, it won’t be stopped so quickly.

The Free Press asked her about her comments, which critics have said were anti-Israel.

"I paid the price for that," said Thomas, a longtime White House correspondent. "But it was worth it, to speak the truth."

Thomas also said in a speech that day:

"We are owned by propagandists against the Arabs. There's no question about that. Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question in my opinion. They put their money where there mouth is . . . We're being pushed into a wrong direction in every way."

Sheesh.

UPDATE 12:50 pm: Heads up to Yid With Lid for obtaining and posting the video.

Thursday, December 2 2010

Shattered Lens - Photo Bias Exposed in the Wire Services

Images have unprecedented power to mold public opinion. And the three international wire services -- AP, Reuters, and AFP/Getty Images -- have a central role in presenting images from Israel and the Palestinian territories to the world.

Until now, however, nobody has commissioned a study to examine the imagery produced by the wire services for identifiable trends that may indicate bias.

To find out if Israel is being treated fairly by the wire services, HonestReporting embarked on a three-month in-depth study of how Israel is portrayed by all three wires. Read the first part on the Gaza flotilla and see what we found.

In an interview with Time, Julian Assange uses Benjamin Netanyahu to defend Wikileaks:

And we can see the Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu coming out with a very interesting statement that leaders should speak in public like they do in private whenever they can. He believes that the result of this publication, which makes the sentiments of many privately held beliefs public, are promising a pretty good [indecipherable] will lead to some kind of increase in the peace process in the Middle East and particularly in relation to Iran.

Assange later called Bibi a "sophisticated politician."

Lest we get carried away, Assange's colleague, James Ball told the Daily Telegraph that there are a lot more cables yet to be released about Israel, the Vatican, North Korea and other regions. No telling what kind of revelations they hold.

But if you listen carefully, you can almost hear Robert Fisk sobbing in his beer.